The County Mental Health Millage: Second Thoughts

Postcard sent to voters before Nov. 2017 election. (Click for full size)

In November 2017 Washtenaw County voters approved a new county property tax millage by nearly a two-to-one margin (see report in the Ann Arbor News). Starting this December (2018) the County will collect a 1-mill tax ostensibly intended to support both County mental health and County public safety operations (i.e., the Sheriff). But for some municipalities who have their own police forces, part of the tax is to be returned to them to use in any way they choose.(We discussed this in detail in Hair on Fire In Ann Arbor.)

The Ann Arbor City Council majority passed a resolution in July 2017 designating their preferences, which leaned strongly toward using the cash for climate change initiatives. In August, the City Administrator Howard Lazarus issued a memorandum to detail exactly how those funds would be allocated. It indicated that proceeds from the millage would be divided so that 20% would go to pedestrian safety, 40% to affordable housing, and 40% for climate change. In the March 12, 2018 budget presentation, these expenditures were further mapped out.

But some citizens are saying “Not so fast”. At the March meeting, as reported by the Ann Arbor News, several citizens complained that they supported the millage in order to support mental health efforts. Their feelings could not have been assuaged much by the indication that part of the money will go to support two staff positions (saving the General Fund some money). Money is fungible, folks. And there is every indication that the use of this money is going to be a campaign issue. Already both the 5th Ward Council challenger, Ali Ramlawi, and Jack Eaton, who is running against Mayor Christopher Taylor, have said that they disagreed with the proposed use of the funds, which they each said should go to mental health. (Eaton is also emphasizing crime prevention.)

Taylor and his caucus argue that Council has been perfectly clear all along about the use of the “rebate” from the millage and that citizens who voted for it understood that the purposes encompassed more than mental health and public safety. But a new citizens’ group begs to differ. Citizens for Mental Health & Public Safety (CMHPS) has issued a press releasein which they request some rethinking of this special windfall. They support the millage issue itself and don’t quarrel with the election results. But they want a refocus, to mental health. Specifically, to drop the climate change allocation and use that money for mental health purposes. From the press release:

CMHPS members urge the City Council to include the following new actions in its planning and budgeting decisions to remedy this omission.. First, Council members should appropriate 40 percent of current and future revenues from the millage to mental health services. Second, Council members should appoint an advisory group of experts to identify best practices for improved mental health services and related public safety services in time to inform the biennial budget process for fiscal years 2020 and 2021.

And to that argument that the public already knew what they were voting for, CMHPS proceeded ahead of time to gather data. They had a professional polling organization conduct a telephone poll. (I received the poll and can report from my own experience that it was not a push poll but seemed to be entirely objectively conducted.) The poll results support their contention that many of the public voting did not understand that part of the millage proceeds would be diverted into other Ann Arbor-specific objectives. When asked what the priority for spending the money would be, 56% answered “mental health services”. When asked whether the information that a different use of the cash would have influenced their vote, 45% said it would have made them less likely to support it.

From the findings of the survey conducted by Public Policy Polling April 2-3, 2018

So how did this disconnect occur? The answer doubtless lies with the way local news is not very well transmitted in Ann Arbor now. We have a very intermittent local newspaper, which most people read online, if at all. City Council deliberations and results are followed by a tiny fraction of the electorate. In this case, probably most people got their information from the campaign material sent out by postcard. You’ll note that the website itself only mentions mental health in its title. It is obvious why many voters had the impression that this was a mental health millage and why they didn’t understand that millions of dollars would be diverted to climate change and other inside-Ann Arbor-purposes.

From the postcard.

In an interview, Glenn Nelson, a leader in this effort to redirect Ann Arbor’s “rebate”, stressed that his group still supports the County millage. (And a majority of the taxes collected will go to the purposes stated.) They simply want the money redirected to Ann Arbor used to address mental health and safety issues. Thus they are fine with pedestrian safety and affordable housing (which often is addressed to serving supportive housing in Ann Arbor; this serves mentally needy clients). But they want the focus to return to mental health for the remainder of the proceeds.

The Council is in the midst of budget discussions. These generally conclude mid-May. We might suppose that some mention of this issue will come up with this year (FY2019) budget, though Lazarus said not in his memo of last summer. Meanwhile, we have electoral campaigns to conduct. The discussion will continue.